There are many lessons to be drawn from the recent U.K. referendum for electoral reform in Canada.

The first is the buyer’s remorse from when people vote on an issue they think they know a lot about, when in fact their knowledge is superficial or incorrect. Will we wake up the day after our referendum learning that the most searched term was “What is first past the post?”

The second lesson is about the powerful role fear can play in motivating voters. In the case of Brexit, it was fear of foreigners. In the case of electoral reform, could it be the fear of Canada’s electoral system morphing into that of Israel or Italy? Referendums are notoriously blunt instruments. Leave or remain doesn’t offer much nuance, and assumes voters understand what each of these options entail.

Political campaigns can also exploit symbols to crystalize fears or hopes in powerful ways. When Nigel Farage stood before a large billboard covered with a photo of Turkish refugees with the words “breaking point,” he was playing the classic political game of association. He didn’t need to spell out his argument fully. And it didn’t really matter that these refugees were not U.K. bound; the power of misleading symbols in the supercharged atmosphere of referendums can be overwhelming and unfortunately persuasive.

Referendums are often billed as a battle of ideas, but in many cases they are distilled to dominant personalities. Boris Johnson and Farage vs. David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn. The media would rather cover these personalities than complex issues. And with the populist messages of Johnson and Farage, it’s easy to see how the messenger became the message.

What’s this have to do with electoral reform? All this reminds us of the importance of a robust information campaign when citizens are consulted. Nothing will prevent any of these problems from occurring here, but they can be mitigated by engaging Canadians early with information that is not only neutral and balanced, but talks about electoral reform in their own terms.

The federal government has released a 38-page guide on hosting an electoral reform event. The first 13 pages are devoted to substantive issues on electoral reform and the remaining 25 pages are on to how to host an event. The document has many strengths: it uses visuals to convey the complexities and trade-offs of each of the major families of electoral systems. It provides a (very) brief FAQ about our current system.

The mechanics of any electoral system are important to understand what it produces in terms of government, kinds of parties and representatives. The guide also discusses design variations, which could be good if citizens were being asked to design a system. But citizens are not being asked to do that when they hold these informal meetings. And an obsession about design mechanics only perpetuates the wrong-headed nature of the conversation. It’s like arguing over the options on a car before you’ve chosen the model.

The focus of these town halls should be on what values matter most to Canadians in an electoral system. I think citizens care less about the allocation of seats than they do about how each system embodies principles such as accountability, fairness, simplicity and inclusiveness.

Should an electoral system offer greater voter choice, create effective parties, be simple and practical or offer fairness of representation? These are ideals that both reformers and non-reformers can rationally discuss without getting lost in the weeds of how votes are transferred under single transferable vote.

This summer as meetings take place across the country, participants and organizers would do well to remember that a meaningful discussion of electoral systems must be grounded in educational materials that speak to values of Canadians regardless of their position on electoral reform.

Jonathan Rose is an associate professor in the Department of Political Studies at Queen’s University. Tweet him @jonathanrose

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.